ANIS Vs. VAIBHAV GOYAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Ashish Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri A.K. Jain, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Vinay Sharma, learned counsel for the respondents.

(2.) These four petitions are by four separate tenants of the same landlord and were proceeded with for release/ eviction in respect of the tenanted shops under Sec. 21(1) of the Uttar Pradesh Regulation of Urban Premises Tenancy Act, 2021 (in short 'Act') on same grounds. The order of eviction has been passed in respect of all the tenants by separate orders passed by the rent authority that were unsuccessfully challenged in rent appeal. Hence these four petitions are filed both against the order of rent authority as well as of appellate Tribunal. Since these petitions raise common question of fact and law, therefore, they are heard and decided together.

(3.) There is no dispute between the petitioners and the landlord regarding jural relationship of tenant-landlord. The landlord came to file release application under Sec. 21(2) of the Act basically on the plea that behind the four shops with Chabutra in question there is an open space of land belonging to landlord which he wanted to use to house the stocks of iron bars, guarders, squares etc. as godown and further to install two gates for the exit and entry of goods with office and washroom on both sides. In order to raise these constructions, he needed to demolish the standing shops and this had become necessary because a lane lying on eastern side of the plot was such narrow that heavy vehicles like Truck, Tractor and Trolley cannot be brought in to the godown. Yet another plea was that the constructions are also in dilapidated stage. Thus, a personal need for the release of the shops was set up to convert the building to be used as godown.